Two different systems for implementing Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) for air traffic control are available for commercial aircraft today. The first CPDLC system is referred to as the Future Air Navigation System (FANS), or FANS CPDLC. FANS based applications are typically implemented on an aircraft's Flight Management Computer (FMC), also referred to as the Flight Management System (FMS), and communicate with air traffic control (ATC) stations using text based messages communicated over the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS). The second CPDLC system is implemented over the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network (ATN) via an aircraft's Communication Management Unit (CMU), also referred to as the Communication Management Function (CMF). The CPDLC system implemented over the ATN via a CMF is commonly referred to as an ATN CPDLC. Use of FANS CPDLC versus ATN CPDLC on an aircraft is largely based on geographical considerations such that an aircraft that travels from a FANS CPDLC region to an ATN CPDLC region would greatly benefit from being able to support both CPDLC systems.
There are problems that arise however when fully independent FANS CPDLC and ATN CPDLC systems are available to an aircraft's flight crew. FANS and ATN CPDLC systems share “alerting” approaches when a CPDLC message is received from a ground controller. In cases where the CMF supports an ATN CPDLC application and the FMC independently supports a FANS CPDLC application, members of the flight crew may become confused as to which system to access after getting a CPDLC alert. Also, with non-integrated systems, it is potentially possible to establish two different CPDLC sessions using the different CPDLC systems at the same time and designate the two different ATC centers associated with the CPDLC sessions as current data authorities (CDAs). This presents a potentially dangerous situation. To avoid the dangers posed by having two current data authorities, some regulations prohibit having different ATC centers simultaneously function as current data authorities. Such a configuration may further face regulatory certification issues if not resolved and could also create training and flight work-load issues.
For the reasons stated above and for other reasons stated below which will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon reading and understanding the specification, there is a need in the art for improved systems and methods for managing non-integrated CPDLC systems on a single aircraft.